Lol nice back-track. If you would just think before you posted at times you'd be way better off.

Not a back track. What I meant by we have no ability to stop them from attacking was there's no way to account for every possible way they could attack. It's impossible. And I find it hard to believe that these people don't know that or wouldn't use that to their advantage. In essence, we haven't been attacked because terrorists groups aren't targeting us seriously and we would have no way to do so if they ever actually did.

Crusaders the occurrence of "adaptations" in human populations has in fact led to differences between groups with respect to the human genome. However uncomfortable it makes people feel there is substantial evidence that natural selection has led to regional differences in the human genome. Net, there is a biological reality to racial differences.

While its true that all humans have the same set of genes, slight and subtle genetic differences from one race to another are expressed in the various forms of a gene (alleles) which are impacted by selection pressures (I'm probably fumbling the explanation here but this is what I understand the research in this area to be saying). It's important to note that this type of research rejects the notion of racial "superiority" in all it's ugly forms but does indicate that genetic differences between races are real and in such areas as health care, important.

Oh and I apologize if my post is viewed as a "micro aggression" that has assaulted the "safe zone" of the more fragile readers of Yappi.

A new peer reviewed publication indicates how cultural (farming) differences can lead to genetic modifications based on selection pressures.

Turkey shoots down a Russian plane. If Russia targets Turkey we are supposed to help Turkey under NATO. This falls squarely on the Obama administrations shoulders. His do nothing attitude may cause severe consequences.

Turkey shoots down a Russian plane. If Russia targets Turkey we are supposed to help Turkey under NATO. This falls squarely on the Obama administrations shoulders. His do nothing attitude may cause severe consequences.

With all of the activity in the region and the shootdown of the Soviet fighter, I'm thinking back to an elementary school reading of Alas, Babylon.

Found a conversation between a guy like crusaders and an Isis member. Obviously fake, but nails it.

It’s like a bad Monty Python sketch:

Isis “We did this because our holy texts exhort us to to do it.”

Crusaders “No you didn’t.”

“Wait, what? Yes we did…”

“No, this has nothing to do with religion. You guys are just using religion as a front for social and geopolitical reasons.”

“WHAT!? Did you even read our official statement? We give explicit Quranic justification. This is jihad, a holy crusade against pagans, blasphemers, and disbelievers.”

“No, this is definitely not a Muslim thing. You guys are not true Muslims, and you defame a great religion by saying so.”

“Huh!? Who are you to tell us we’re not true Muslims!? Islam is literally at the core of everything we do, and we have implemented the truest most literal and honest interpretation of its founding texts. It is our very reason for being.”

“Nope. We created you. We installed a social and economic system that alienates and disenfranchises you, and that’s why you did this. We’re sorry.”

“What? Why are you apologizing? We just slaughtered you mercilessly in the streets. We targeted unwitting civilians – disenfranchisement doesn’t even enter into it!”

Turkey shoots down a Russian plane. If Russia targets Turkey we are supposed to help Turkey under NATO. This falls squarely on the Obama administrations shoulders. His do nothing attitude may cause severe consequences.

If Russia targets Turkey than that's on Russia, not our administration. Yes, he could pull a Bush and lead Russia by silence that we're accepting of their retaliation but that's not been done.

They got themselves addicted, why should others pay to "cure" them? It's only jail time if they break the law - criminals should face jail time, or fines, or some other punishment, let them pay for their own rehab out of the money they'd have spent on drugs.

They got themselves addicted, why should others pay to "cure" them? It's only jail time if they break the law - criminals should face jail time, or fines, or some other punishment, let them pay for their own rehab out of the money they'd have spent on drugs.

Instead of continually wasting money on the War on Drugs, which has never and will never work, use that money to help people. This, along with the decriminalization(and eventually complete legalization) of all drugs is a much more efficient approach, IMO.

The question is are we really naive to believe that we can create a "drug free" country? Obviously it will never be anything but a utopian fantasy. With that said, who would we rather have in charge of these substances? Gangs, cartels, and criminals, or should we let the market take control where regulations can be implemented, much like alcohol and tobacco?

Instead of continually wasting money on the War on Drugs, which has never and will never work, use that money to help people. This, along with the decriminalization(and eventually complete legalization) of all drugs is a much more efficient approach, IMO.

The question is are we really naive to believe that we can create a "drug free" country? Obviously it will never be anything but a utopian fantasy. With that said, who would we rather have in charge of these substances? Gangs, cartels, and criminals, or should we let the market take control where regulations can be implemented, much like alcohol and tobacco?

I love the argument about the alcohol and tobacco because the comparison to narcotics is so mis-used. We spend billions on anti-alcohol and anti-smoking programs - why add another problem to the mix that we eventually try to get rid of?

I've always been a fan of interdiction (gives our military some live-fire exercises). I've also said, if we are finding illegal drugs, lace them with poison and let them in, the war on drugs hasn't worked because we haven't really fought a war and there's really been no real deterrent. Let the addicts and the criminals take care of themselves. Either the costs of delivery will rise because the drug cartels will have to do a better job with protecting the merchandise or it will be such a risk that some people might never start.

I love the argument about the alcohol and tobacco because the comparison to narcotics is so mis-used. We spend billions on anti-alcohol and anti-smoking programs - why add another problem to the mix that we eventually try to get rid of?

I've always been a fan of interdiction (gives our military some live-fire exercises). I've also said, if we are finding illegal drugs, lace them with poison and let them in, the war on drugs hasn't worked because we haven't really fought a war and there's really been no real deterrent. Let the addicts and the criminals take care of themselves. Either the costs of delivery will rise because the drug cartels will have to do a better job with protecting the merchandise or it will be such a risk that some people might never start.

Thankfully there is a shift in thinking taking place in this country when it comes to drugs. This view of yours will soon be archaic amongst the people.